Eric’s Bad Movies: ‘Inspector Gadget’ (1999)
It’s generally held that 1999 was a great year for movies, but there were some notable exceptions. One such misfire was “Inspector Gadget,” which is the subject of this week’s edition of Eric’s Bad Movies at Film.com. I actually remember seeing this in the theater. I had just started writing reviews for the newspaper I worked for, mostly on my own time and at my own expense, and I must have written a brief, capsule-length review of this one. Alas, those mini-reviews have not survived into the digital age, so I don’t know what I said about the movie at the time. My feelings were probably no more charitable then than they are now, though.
Next week we’ll be getting into the Christmas films, starting with a family flick that sounds terrible as soon as you hear its premise. It shares a title with a completely unrelated movie of a wholly different genre. Guesses?
December 4th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
I’m going with Jack Frost
December 4th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
I never would have guessed Inspector Gadget, as I figured it starred Brenden Fraser. Makes me wonder how the movie got made without him, seems like some kind of violation cartoon to live action transitions.
December 4th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
B, according to IMDB, Brendan Fraser was considered for the role. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0141369/trivia
December 4th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
I would say Jingle All the Way, but there’s not another movie of the same name in a different genre. I always thought that movie was so very stupid.
December 4th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
I think Moffio’s got it: Jack Frost runs on the awful premise of a kid’s dead dad coming back to life in the form of a snowman, and shares its title with a slasher movie about… a psychotic snowman. The latter film was only notable for having a scene in which the villain rapes Shannon Elizabeth with his carrot nose. Just thought I’d throw that out there.
December 4th, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Oh, yep, must be Jack Frost.
December 4th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
Ah come on. You don’t think “Dead dad is resurrected as a snowman so he can go snowboarding with his son” is a good premise?
December 4th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
Upper division physics references? Pretty soon you’re going to have to break down Laplace’s equation for us.
December 4th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
Darnit! Why is it someone always beats me to it when I actually know the answer?
One of these day–one of these days…
December 4th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
Interestingly, Jack Frost was also a 1964 Russian/Finnish movie based on a Russian fairy tale: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Frost_(1964_film). And subsequently featured on Mystery Science Theater 3000.
December 4th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
I concur, this has the stink of Jack Frost all over it.
December 4th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
David Manning, I always had the same problem–but then last week I had the good fortune to be right there with “Inspector Gadget”. It can happen–don’t give up!!
December 4th, 2008 at 7:45 pm
Suskie, I’m offended by your use of the R-word. It is horribly tasteless and not funny. I demand that Eric replace that word with [does something highly objectionable].
December 4th, 2008 at 8:39 pm
Lol @ &
December 4th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
I wasn’t making it up. Are we at the point now where we’re SO sensitive, we can’t even call something by the legitimate word that describes it?
December 5th, 2008 at 12:04 am
Suskie, Ampersand was making a reference to something Eric wrote in his blog. It was a joke and a very funny one.
December 5th, 2008 at 12:40 am
Oh, okay. That’s what I hate about the internet, it’s very hard to convey a joking tone.
December 5th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
Sorry, Suskie, next time I’ll be more obvious when I’m making a joke. It was all in good fun, and I hope I didn’t make you mad. And I’ll be a sheep and agree that next week’s bad movie is “Jack Frost”–the Michael Keaton one, hopefully not the one featuring sexual assault with a vegetable.
December 5th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
Actually now I’m kinda wishing Eric would do both.
December 5th, 2008 at 5:05 pm
I never saw either Jack Frost, but I did think it was a really bad idea when the one came out about the dad. “Don’t worry, Kid, even though your dad is dead. He’ll be back for a while, until he melts.”
December 5th, 2008 at 7:53 pm
No problem Ampersand, I just know that (unfortunately) there really ARE people out there who’d get offended by the very appearance of that word. As a regular reader of Eric’s though, I probably should’ve been able to figure out that you weren’t serious.
December 5th, 2008 at 9:21 pm
So, um, I don’t get Raul’s comment. Where’s the physics reference?
December 5th, 2008 at 9:22 pm
Nevermind–I get it.